Richard Neal, a Democratic representative from Springfield, Massachusetts, has been a prominent figure in politics for over three decades. In January 2019, he achieved a significant milestone by becoming the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, a position that holds considerable power in shaping the nation’s tax code.
However, a year later, his son Brendan Neal, aged 45, launched a solo public affairs firm specializing in political advice, lobbying, and strategic communications. Shortly after the firm’s establishment, payments began flowing from Richard Neal’s campaign committee to Brendan Neal Strategies. These payments, totaling $196,340, were designated for “strategic consulting services” and were consistently made on the 13th of each month.
Interestingly, Brendan Neal’s involvement in lobbying started before his firm received payments from his father’s campaign. He received payments from Van Heuvelen Strategies, a lobbying firm with interests in several issues under the jurisdiction of the Ways and Means Committee. Additionally, Brendan Neal received payments from a nursing home in Springfield and a business mogul, further expanding his portfolio in the lobbying space.
One notable contract that Brendan Neal secured was with a Boston-based technology company, which proved to be his most lucrative deal, totaling $252,500 over multiple quarters. This contract coincided with a lobbyist’s significant earnings from the administrative arm of Blackstone, a private equity firm that has been a top donor to Richard Neal.
As Richard Neal gears up to lead the House Ways and Means Committee through a crucial period of tax renegotiations, concerns have been raised about his son’s lobbying activities and their potential influence on tax policy decisions. Critics, including tax advocacy groups and progressives, have expressed apprehensions about the perceived conflict of interest and close ties to special interests.
In response to these concerns, Richard and Brendan Neal declined to be interviewed. A spokesperson for Richard Neal emphasized that the congressman does not discuss official business with his son and highlighted the positive impact of his policies on average Americans. The campaign committee defended Brendan Neal’s part-time role, stating his qualifications and expertise in Massachusetts campaigns.
Despite the scrutiny surrounding his lobbying work, Brendan Neal remains steadfast in his dedication to advocating for causes such as LGBT suicide prevention, the opioid crisis, climate change, and American industry. He maintains that he has always adhered to ethics rules and is proud of his achievements, which he attributes to his hard work and commitment to various important issues. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut were employed by lobbying firms or trade associations to influence their husbands, who were powerful figures on Capitol Hill.
While Brendan Neal’s business dealings may not be illegal, the optics of his connections to his father’s committee are raising eyebrows among those who closely follow the intersection of money and politics in Washington.
“It’s not uncommon for family members of powerful lawmakers to work in Washington,” said Meredith McGehee, executive director of Issue One, a nonprofit that advocates for government ethics and campaign finance reform. “But when their jobs intersect with the core work of those lawmakers, it can create the appearance of conflicts of interest — and sometimes the reality.”
“The challenge for lawmakers like Richard Neal is to ensure that the influence of his family members, who have their own professional interests, doesn’t improperly impact his official duties and decisions,” she added.
For his part, Richard Neal has sought to distance himself from his son’s lobbying work — telling Politico in a statement that he doesn’t “lobby my father and we don’t discuss my business.”
But as Brendan Neal’s client list grows and his earnings increase, the elder Neal may find it increasingly difficult to maintain that separation — especially as he faces pressure to deliver on major tax legislation, with the eyes of Washington and the nation watching.
Tom Daschle of South Dakota, a former Senate Majority Leader, has weighed in on the recent revelations about the influence wielded by lobbyists who are related to politicians. Daschle, who served in the Senate for 18 years and has firsthand experience with the inner workings of Washington, expressed concern about the potential conflicts of interest that can arise when family members of elected officials work as lobbyists.
In a recent interview, Daschle highlighted the limitations on what can be done with campaign funds, leading some politicians to turn to their family members for business opportunities. This practice, he argued, can create a perception of impropriety and undermine public trust in the political process. Daschle emphasized the need for transparency and accountability in government to prevent abuses of power.
The issue of lobbyists with close ties to politicians is not new in Washington, but recent reports have shed light on the extent of their influence. Richard Painter, a former chief ethics lawyer for the George W. Bush administration and now a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, pointed out that lobbyists have long been interested in key congressional committees like Ways and Means. He cautioned against allowing lobbyists to pay family members of politicians large sums of money while also lobbying for favorable policies.
The case of Richard Neal, a Democratic congressman from Massachusetts who chairs the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, serves as a cautionary tale. Neal’s rapid rise in Springfield politics, from a working-class upbringing to mayor and eventually to Congress, was marred by allegations of impropriety. An investigation into a no-bid contract awarded by Neal raised questions about potential conflicts of interest and political favoritism.
Despite these challenges, Neal has managed to ascend to the top Democratic position on the Ways and Means Committee and become its chairman in 2019. He has used his influence to push for major legislation, including the Build Back Better Act, which aimed to address key issues like corporate taxes, healthcare, and climate change. While the bill ultimately did not become law, Neal’s efforts were praised by his colleagues for their ambition and impact.
However, Neal has also faced criticism for his connections to the business community, including hosting a reception for a major insurance company that had previously received a bailout. Some have raised concerns about his willingness to consider business concerns over public interests, especially as he prepares to retake the gavel of the Ways and Means Committee.
As the debate over lobbying and political influence continues to unfold in Washington, figures like Tom Daschle and Richard Neal serve as reminders of the challenges facing elected officials in maintaining ethical standards and public trust. The intersection of money, power, and influence in politics remains a complex and fraught issue that requires ongoing scrutiny and reform. Richard Neal, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, is a figure of significant influence in the world of tax policy. Many admire him for his leadership and knowledge in the field, describing him as someone who commands respect and authority.
However, not everyone sees Neal in a positive light. Progressive groups, in particular, have criticized Neal for his approach to taxation, accusing him of being too lenient on the ultra-wealthy and multinational corporations. They argue that Neal has prioritized the interests of a few select groups over the broader needs of the American public, especially when it comes to funding important social programs.
According to some critics, Neal has a tendency to prioritize the concerns of special interests over the needs of ordinary Americans. They claim that he has repeatedly blocked efforts to increase taxes on wealthy individuals and industries like insurance, opting instead for more moderate and incremental changes.
One former House aide who worked on tax policies described Neal as ruling the committee with an “iron fist,” stifling progressive efforts to push for more ambitious tax proposals. Critics argue that Neal’s close ties to certain industries and his family’s involvement in his political career have influenced his decision-making process.
Indeed, Neal’s family members have played active roles in his political life, with his son Brendan Neal receiving substantial payments from Neal’s campaign committee. Brendan Neal’s work in lobbying and public affairs has raised questions about potential conflicts of interest, particularly in relation to his father’s legislative activities.
One notable example is Brendan Neal’s work for a biotechnology company seeking government contracts, which coincided with his father’s efforts to pass key legislation. Critics have raised concerns about the close connections between Brendan Neal’s lobbying activities and the interests of companies benefiting from his father’s work in Congress.
Similarly, Neal’s relationship with lobbying firms representing major corporations like Blackstone has also come under scrutiny. Critics argue that these connections raise questions about Neal’s impartiality and his commitment to representing the interests of ordinary taxpayers.
Overall, Richard Neal’s leadership on tax policy has sparked controversy and debate among various interest groups. While some admire his expertise and experience, others question his alliances with powerful industries and his commitment to progressive taxation policies. As the debate over tax reform continues, Neal’s actions and decisions will undoubtedly be closely scrutinized by both his supporters and detractors. It is clear that the private equity industry has been successful in preventing proposals to raise taxes on carried interest income. This loophole has allowed private equity tycoons to benefit from favorable tax treatment, much to the dismay of many Democrats.
In 2019, there was a push to close the carried interest loophole, led by Bill Pascrell, a member of the Ways and Means Committee. However, the legislation that ultimately emerged only extended the holding period to qualify for favorable tax treatment from three to five years. This move was seen as a disappointment by many Democrats, as it did not effectively address the issue.
The legislation crafted under Richard Neal also included a carve-out for carried interest related to real estate, which would have greatly benefited Blackstone, the world’s largest private equity firm. Critics saw this as a way to give the appearance of reform without actually addressing the problem.
When the Inflation Reduction Act was being debated in the Senate in 2022, only two lobbyists were advocating on tax issues for Blackstone’s administrative arm. This included Brendan Neal, who had connections to Trant, as well as Ryan McConaghy, a former senior adviser to Chuck Schumer.
Other firms that had dealings with Brendan Neal also appeared to notch wins in Richard Neal’s legislation. Van Heuvelen Strategies, for example, paid Brendan Neal to lobby on behalf of a biofuel company while also lobbying for tax provisions involved in Build Back Better and Secure 2.0. The firm made contributions to Richard Neal and was under contract for lobbying on tax credits for businesses that recapture and store carbon dioxide.
The carbon-capture industry was pleased with the legislation that passed through Richard Neal’s committee, which significantly expanded the credit for businesses. Similarly, Van Heuvelen’s firm was paid to lobby for a New York insurance company on taxes and other issues related to Secure 2.0, which expanded options for retirees to invest in insurance contracts.
Lobbyist Rob Epplin also had a hand in advocating for his clients’ tax priorities, including lobbying for the Trevor Project and the National Association of Broadcasters. Overall, it is clear that lobbying efforts have played a significant role in shaping tax legislation and benefiting certain industries and companies.
In recent years, there has been increased scrutiny on the relationships between lobbyists, lawmakers, and their family members. A recent case that has come to light involves Brendan Neal, the son of Congressman Richard Neal, who has been working as a lobbyist for various clients, including a nursing home company in western Massachusetts. The firm paid Epplin’s firm $180,000 between 2021 and 2022 to lobby on advertising and media-related tax issues, among other topics.
One of the association’s priorities included legislation introduced to Ways and Means in June of 2021 that would allow journalism outlets to defray up to $25,000 in employment taxes for each local journalist they employed in the first year and $15,000 in the next four years — at a total cost of $1.7 billion over 10 years. The final version of Build Back Better, as passed by the House, contained the provisions, for which the president of the National Association of Broadcasters thanked Richard Neal.
In addition to lobbying for media-related tax issues, Epplin was also representing an association of trial lawyers on tax matters that affect trial lawyers. Notably, provisions were included in the Build Back Better Act that would have changed the ways the IRS treats deductions for trial lawyers.
In contingency fee cases, trial lawyers receive a percentage of their client’s settlement when the case resolves. The proposal advocated by the trial lawyer association would have allowed trial lawyers to deduct their costs immediately, regardless of whether they ultimately get reimbursed for those expenses later. The changes to such deductions, as included in the Build Back Better legislation, were set to be a $2.5 billion boon to trial lawyers in the form of tax write-offs, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.
While most of Brendan Neal’s clients were federal lobbying firms subcontracting out work to him, one of Brendan Neal’s other clients, a nursing home company in western Massachusetts, had ties to local business mogul Cesar Ruiz. Ruiz had poured $190,000 into a super PAC in 2023 to get involved in Massachusetts politics, but the super PAC was forced to dissolve due to campaign finance violations. Ruiz did not respond to requests for comment, but local political players claim that it’s impossible to move up in Springfield politics without Richard Neal’s blessing.
There has long been a loophole in ethics law that allows for family members of lawmakers to receive money from lobbyists, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Ethics experts emphasize the importance of avoiding appearances of undue influence and ensuring transparency in lobbying activities.
As the relationship between lobbyists, lawmakers, and their family members continues to be scrutinized, it is essential for policymakers to uphold ethical standards and maintain transparency in their interactions with special interests. The case involving Brendan Neal and his lobbying activities highlights the need for greater oversight and accountability in the lobbying industry. Richard Neal, the Democratic lawmaker from Massachusetts, has come under scrutiny for the consulting services his son, Brendan Neal, provides to his campaign committee. While campaign finance laws allow lawmakers to pay relatives for services at fair market rates, questions have been raised about whether Richard Neal is using his campaign funds appropriately.
Kathleen Clark, a legal ethics expert and professor at Washington University School of Law, has pointed out that while Brendan Neal may be providing commensurate services for his payments, there is still a valid concern about whether Richard Neal is using his campaign as a “slush fund” to benefit his family member. This issue has raised eyebrows as both Democrats and Republicans are gearing up for the expiration of the Trump tax cuts in 2025.
Tax policy experts are particularly concerned about the optics of Brendan Neal’s lobbying work, especially when his clients have business before the Ways and Means Committee, which Richard Neal chairs. With the 2025 tax debate looming, lobbyists are already looking to influence the negotiations.
One of the key questions in the 2025 tax debate is how foreign-based companies will be treated in terms of tax benefits. Republicans are pushing for deductions to be clawed back from companies that don’t manufacture their goods in America, while also proposing a lower corporate tax rate for domestic producers. This debate is crucial as many provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) are set to expire in 2025.
Michael DiRoma, a managing partner at the lobbying firm DiRoma Eck and Co. LLP, has highlighted the importance of connecting with policymakers early on to influence tax policy decisions. DiRoma, a former tax counsel to Senator Susan Collins and a lobbyist on international tax issues, emphasizes the need to take proactive steps to advocate for favorable tax policies.
With a team that includes former Treasury Department officials and tax policy veterans, DiRoma’s firm is well-equipped to navigate the complex world of tax policy. Brendan Neal, as a senior adviser at the firm, brings his expertise to the table and plays a key role in shaping the firm’s strategy.
In conclusion, the controversy surrounding Richard Neal and his son’s consulting services raises important questions about campaign finance ethics and tax policy. As the 2025 tax debate approaches, stakeholders across the political spectrum are closely watching how these issues will be addressed.
